googologywikiaorg-20200223-history
User talk:Vel!/Archive 5
hello leave me a message please You're welcome. King2218 (talk) 17:22, April 18, 2015 (UTC) A Question Why is your user photo...nothing? -- From the googol and beyond -- 23:45, April 17, 2015 (UTC) :It's rebranded. AarexWikia04 (talk) 11:25, July 29, 2016 (UTC) -- Who owns this wiki? 19:17, June 21, 2015 (UTC) There are a few possible answers: *Vel! *No one *Everyone, excluding spambots and such -SJ224 19:34, June 21, 2015 (UTC) : Technically Vel! is the creator and thus the owner, but it is a lot more of a public property than anyone's in particular. LittlePeng9 (talk) 20:08, June 21, 2015 (UTC) : This site is owned and operated by Wikia, Inc. Pages are the intellectual property of their authors, and licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0. Images and media have varying licenses, ranging from fair use to public domain. -- ve 03:41, June 23, 2015 (UTC) Thanks for putting up all those images for the functions; they really bring an atmosphere to the articles! Also, the roast beef- PERFECTION xD QuasarBooster (talk) 21:43, July 19, 2015 (UTC) I think they're a little silly, but they aren't over the top so I don't really have a problem with it. -SJ224 13:23, July 21, 2015 (UTC) : I especially like one here, it's a beautiful bird. LittlePeng9 (talk) 13:42, July 21, 2015 (UTC) Your expectations should've grown over time Regarding this and this edit, I think your (or perhaps our) expectations appear to be grown. I remember that you being the one who proposed to call the Takeuti-Feferman-Buchholz ordinal the "Holy–Shit ordinal". -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 07:20, August 28, 2015 (UTC) :You got me there. The intent of the first edit was to cut back on terms like "extremely fast-growing" which is true of, y'know, every function on the wiki. -- ve 18:23, August 28, 2015 (UTC) Rayo's number lower bound formula I'm looking at this comment about Rayo's number: Defining "(¬∃1(1∈2))" (10 symbols) puts a 0 in x2. Defining "(1∈2∧(¬∃1(1∈3∧(¬1=2))))" (23 symbols) puts a 1 in x3. Defining "(2∈3∧(¬∃1(1∈4∧((¬1=2)∧(¬1=3)))))" (32 symbols) puts a 2 in x4. Defining "(3∈4∧(¬∃1(1∈5∧((¬1=2)∧((¬1=3)∧(¬1=4))))))" (41 symbols) puts a 3 in x5. etc. AND-ing together n expressions takes an additional 3n - 3 symbols. 0 takes at most 10 symbols. 1 takes at most 3 + 23 symbols. 2 takes at most 6 + 23 + 32 symbols. 3 takes at most 9 + 23 + 32 + 41 symbols. etc. Therefore the number of symbols it takes to Rayo-name n is at most (9n2 + 43n)/2. But the formula doesn't match the actual lengths of expressions needed. When n=0 we get (9n^2+43n)/2=0, not 10. You need 10 symbols to assert the existence of 0. For n=1 I'm getting 26 vs. 36. You have to combine the two together to assert the existence of 1. As stated on the main page, the assertion for 1 is : (((¬∃3(3∈2))∧2∈1)∧(¬∃3(3∈1∧(¬3=2)))) which is a 10-symbol part "(¬∃3(3∈2))" plus a "(" and "2∈1)∧(¬∃3(3∈1∧(¬3=2)))" adding up to 23, plus the 3 symbols "( ∧ )" needed to put them all together: 10+3+23=36. (The parentheses are moved around a little, but not in a way that breaks the formula.) Similarly for n=2, (9n^2+43n)/2 formula gives 61, but we actually need 10+23+32+6 = 71. For n=3 I have 105 vs. 115. So I want to add 10 to the formula and make it "(9n^2+43n)/2+10" or "(9n^2+43n+20)/2". Mrob27 (talk) 17:58, February 1, 2016 (UTC) :Actually, I have thought up a way to define a natural number "n" in 42n+10 symbols, like this: :0 is defined as ¬∃n(n∈a0)", and an+1 is recursively defined as: "...∧an∈an+1∧¬∃n(n∈an∧¬(n∈an+1))∧¬∃n(n∈an+1∧¬(n=an)∧¬(n∈an)" :This definition starts out slow (for n=1 we need 52 symbols as opposed to 36 symbols), but it overtakes the other way quite quickly at n=5. By n=10 we have 430 symbols in this definition, but 2610 symbols in the other definition. Maybe called Googology Noob (talk) 12:23, February 27, 2016 (UTC) ::@Googology Noob I honestly don't remember where we got that convention from, and I can't find a reference at the moment, but for Rayo's definition we always took the encoding of numbers as \(0=\{\},1=\{\{\}\},2=\{\{\{\}\}\},3=\{\{\{\{\}\}\}\}\dots\), while your definition works if we use a different convention (von Neumann ordinals). LittlePeng9 (talk) 14:03, February 27, 2016 (UTC) :::If so, we have an even simpler definition! :::0 is defined as "¬∃n(n∈a0)" and an+1 is recursively defined as "...∧an∈an+1∧¬∃n(n∈an+1∧¬(n=an))". This definition takes only 20n+10 symbols, so the bound is improved even more! Maybe called Googology Noob (talk) 16:16, February 27, 2016 (UTC) ::::Actually, never mind what I said above; after taking a better look at formulas Mrob quoted I'm pretty sure that the way of encoding numbers as sets is actually via von Neumann ordinals. In either way, nice job on getting linear bounds, although they will have worse constants than claimed ones, because FOST requires more parentheses than you use in these formulas. LittlePeng9 (talk) 17:22, February 27, 2016 (UTC) :@Mrob27 Sorry no one addressed the issue before. Indeed you are right, and the derivation in the article seems to forget about the initial 10 characters we need to define 0. I am going to correct this. :Also, next time, please don't use user pages to talk about contents of a single article, but instead use a respective talk page, like this one. LittlePeng9 (talk) 14:03, February 27, 2016 (UTC) ::We must use this one, due to limiting sets reducing it. 13:14, January 9, 2018 (UTC) We got Discord server! Horray! AarexWikia04 (talk) 01:46, July 25, 2016 (UTC) :No thanks. -- ve 07:19, July 29, 2016 (UTC) :Sorry, the invite expired. Do you want me to send you the invite, or you don't want discord server on Googology Wiki? -- From the googol and beyond -- 22:04, July 29, 2016 (UTC) About "i'm going to delete them all" On a comment on this blog post, you said that you're going to delete all those new pages created during your absense. I'm genuinely concerned about this. Are you being serious? Or are you just pulling our leg? -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 15:43, July 29, 2016 (UTC) :lol just wanted to see what would happen if i said that -- ve 21:02, August 19, 2016 (UTC) Successor limit hierarchy Hi I am Norman Wildberger, an A/Prof at UNSW with a YouTube channel user njwildberger. On my MathFoundations playlist, I have been discussing big numbers in a different kind of way than you might have seen. Please see the MathFoundations173 -186 lectures for an intro to the successor-limit hierarchy of arithmetical operations, which can help organize our march towards bigger numbers. 19:43, September 8, 2016 (UTC) :Your videos are highly educative and interesting, i had already seen some them earlier. i respectfully disagree with some of your points of view in the subjects of infinities and set theory, but it has been constructive to hear your arguments. :Your star operator is googologically interesting. I believe you defined well it up to n*_{n*_{4}n}n, which is on the order of goodstein sequences, or as we call in this wikia "epsilon_0 level". in fact, n*_{n*_{...{0}...}n}n (which would look like a V shaped descending chain of n* that reascends from its bottom point with a ladder of ns on your white board) is at the level of φ(1,0,0), known as gamma zero or the feferman-schütte ordinal, the limit of the basic veblen function (Chronolegends (talk) 01:23, September 9, 2016 (UTC)). :Hi Norman, I'm sorry but I'm not very active on this site and I can't really offer a useful response. The forums might be a good place to publicize your work, or a blog post if you don't mind creating a Wikia acct. -- ve 07:27, September 15, 2016 (UTC) A silly question If I allways need an outside source,then can the source be something that I invented and wrote about in my own website?Can I add a page with the source being a page from my website?Boboris02 (talk) 19:48, October 15, 2016 (UTC) :Please read: Project:Policy#Original work (READ THIS!) -- ve 05:40, November 11, 2016 (UTC) I found this in the forum I saw you provide a link to a weird site.Can you tell me what the hell is this?Boboris02 (talk) 18:25, February 25, 2017 (UTC) :This is sweet bro and hella jeff. LittlePeng9 (talk) 19:58, February 25, 2017 (UTC) ::I can see that,but it doesn't answer my question.Boboris02 (talk) 22:24, February 26, 2017 (UTC) :::As LittlePeng9 said, it's Sweet Bro and Hella Jeff, an intentionally low-quality webcomic. Here's some more explanation. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 03:27, February 27, 2017 (UTC) :::But why did he link it?Boboris02 (talk) 20:56, March 7, 2017 (UTC) ::::I don't remember linking it. Not everything needs an explanation. -- ve 22:00, March 7, 2017 (UTC) Trolls I saw "don't feed the trolls" and I'm still laughing xD Nathan Richardson "Simon Weston" 20:43, August 27, 2017 (UTC) :seriously though, don't engage them (well, him). kid just wants attention. in five years he's going to look back on these days and wish he had spent his time doing better things. -- ve 20:48, August 27, 2017 (UTC) Please stop him Vel!! :Good point. Nathan Richardson "Simon Weston" 17:47, October 8, 2017 (UTC) : Please block the troll. Trump has returned and is ugly. He has done a lot of vandalism over the past hour. He needs to be stopped. Please Nathan Richardson "Simon Weston" 00:39, October 12, 2017 (UTC) Deedlit1 1 how do you put Recursive ordinals in 1 to 1 correspondance with the natural numbers 18:19, December 27, 2017 (UTC) WaxPlanck (talk) 22:10, January 22, 2018 (UTC) Can you please delete my blog post http://googology.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:WaxPlanck/Forum:Is_Hedrondude_a_Real_Mathematician%3F because I started a forum trying to raise a seemingly legitimate but very small issue (I used harsh language, and I'm sorry about that) so I don't have no misinformation out because of a forum I started? (Please write on my talk page when you deleted it.) If you are concerned with the current sockpuppetry... Send a request to the FANDOM staff using . I am neutral over Wikity Split's current behavior. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 18:17, February 24, 2018 (UTC) :VSTF would be the right folks to contact. i'm genuinely sorry to leave this in your hands, but i'm unable to help out since i am very busy as of late. i've also handed you long overdue b-crat rights. peace, and my apologies again �� -- ve 08:09, March 8, 2018 (UTC) ::VSTF and FANDOM Staff are different groups of people, though. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 09:09, March 8, 2018 (UTC) ---- Hi! Just want'd to say thanks for creating all of this. I haven't been a member very long, but I have really enjoy'd my time here so far! Meowzz (talk) 15:58, March 22, 2018 (UTC) I'd Like To Be Sure... I don't think someone can expand on their notation in an existing article about said notation, can they? PlantStar/Alpineer 19:09, April 1, 2018 (UTC) :What do you mean by "expand on their notaation"? Rpakr (talk) 20:12, April 1, 2018 (UTC) :I mean include more information about the notation and how it is defined. PlantStar/Alpineer 05:38, April 2, 2018 (UTC)